Hard not to feel nostalgic, as most of us on this forum probably associate the 747 with international air travel.
However time marches on, and it’s also nice to notice how much nicer and quieter the 787 and A350 are, not to mention more efficient.
However time marches on, and it’s also nice to notice how much nicer and quieter the 787 and A350 are, not to mention more efficient.
Occasionally you hear about cabin layouts that provide more width and/or pitch, but these never come close to recovering the space that has been lost over the past 20 years. Airlines don't announce space reductions, after all. For them it's always quietly 3 steps ahead (less space), loudly 1 step back ("roomier" seats).
Recently I read that Airbus was developing a revision to the A350 that would permit adding an entire additional row. Airbus had to do this because not only does the 777X support 10-abreast layout, but most customers have long moved to 10-abreast layout in the older 777 despite the 777 never being designed for 10-abreast. In fact, IIRC 1 or 2 major A350 operators had already moved to 10-abreast on the existing models, but they may be pushing the regulatory envelope, thus the need for Airbus to cooperate with some redesign work.
I've generally preferred Airbus planes. For reasons I never really understood (perhaps by mere coincidence of their design process, coincidences in evolutions in cabin construction material, or maybe deliberate design by Airbus), economy coach layouts typically provided anywhere from 1/2 to 2+ more inches of seat width relative to the comparable Boeing plane and cabin. A Boeing 737 or 737MAX with even the newest cabin construction technology is always going to be a tighter squeeze (at least width-wise) than an Airbus A320, for example.
Coach layouts for the A350 are likely going to shift from being some of the best to some of the worst in long-haul travel as the additional row comes half from accommodating thinner walls, and half from seats with less width. Same thing happened with the 777: when it first entered service it was one of the roomiest; now with 10 rows, and especially when invariably combined with reduced seat pitch (which I personally don't care quite as much about as others) it's soul crushing--metaphorically, figuratively, literally, actually, physically, all of the above.
10 abreast in a350 sounds terrible though. Might work for shorter ultra cheap charters but I very much doubt that any mainline carrier would consider it. Think they did a similar concept with 11-abreast a380 but luckily no-one caught on.
The only reason it's never been tried in an a380 is because people already can't fill those up, so what would be the point of more seats?
(That was more of a side reason. The real reason is that the FAA requires an additional flight attendant for every 50 seats, so Jetblue just removed enough seats to get to a round multiple of 50 and decrease the amount of labor required.)
"Seat pitch" is the term you're looking for, and the airlines have been steadily reducing the seat pitch over the last ~decade to squeeze in an extra few rows.
Some airlines are notably worse than others. Spirit and Frontier, in particular.
https://www.businessinsider.com/airline-seats-shrunk-over-ti...
Spirit for a one or two hour hop vs Spirit across the continental US is two different experiences.
(Why not just build more planes? Airbus is backlogged for years, and there aren't enough pilots. Spirit is a package deal in that sense.)
https://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2015-10-27/the-airlines-w...
If you want to fly 747 - Lufthansa is your friend as the sole operator of the passenger version 747-8. Business on the upper deck is a delight in that plane, especially the window seat.
We flew our second leg in a 777 and it was noticeably louder and more airplane like.
The very first one was on one of their newest A380s which even let you pair my Bose Quiet Comforts with the in flight entertainment system over Bluetooth. That really was the dream.
Korean Air and Air China also operate the type, but Lufthansa does fly more than half of the 747-8I production, excluding VIP-configured aircraft.
I sort of understand the economics of why they don't work for shorter routes, but those long flights are still extremely necessary, and everything else is godawful.
Recently I flew back from Europe on a 787 and that too was a wonderful experience. The plane feels like the future and was so comfortable and nice to be on.
I'm going to assume many people here have never flown on one.